Has censorship come to this board?

[skeptic]

Apparantly the format isn't the only thing that has changed here In the past, this has been a very free and open place to discuss just about anything people who post care to including those subjects not related to cables. Even flame wars including anglo saxonisms were tolerated to a degree and allowed to burn themselves out. It was only a couple of years ago that anyone even had to register to post here. Many of the people who post here post at other audio related sites including Cable Asylum. That goes for Jon Risch as well. He used to post here frequently. I don't know if he just tired of this place, has been too busy with being moderator of Cable Asylum, or felt his views were too discredited to show his face very often but he apparantly still makes a rare appearance here. Because of the number of people who do post there or those who left there and come here as a real refuge to a place of free expression, there is still a lot of interest about what goes on there, although not by me. I was only there for a very brief time several years ago, left in disgust quickly and never established any attachment or interest in it.

Well now it seems that by locking a thread and telling people who post here that discussion of that site and their moderator is off limits, censorship has arrived here and their actions cannot be criticized without meeting the approval of our own new censor in chief. Is it the approaching Thanksgiving holiday or has this new ominous element put a chill in what was ordinarily a very active message board.

If it continues and it becomes apparant that we must watch our words because we have our own new Communist Gestapo censor to deal with, I am outta here. And that means all the boards. No more advice or counseling to newbies about speakers, amplifiers, phonograph cartridges or recordings. That would make this not the kind of place I would frequent. And unlike some others, if I leave, I for one am NEVER coming back under this moniker or any other.

[FLZapped]

How sweet of you to notice.....especially since the thread was starting to go a different direction of it's own volition.

Well, Happy Thanksgiving anyway.

-Bruce

[skeptic]

We have to consider the possibility that the new censor is a shill or mole for Cable Asylum and he is actually somehow associated with them or is even Jon Risch himself under an assumed moniker. Why would anyone want to protect Cable Asylum from criticism on this board? What motive would there be for the moderator to become an extension of the censorship imposed there? Does Ted, or Rod, or Jon or whoever just call up the new moderator and say, stifle that thread or don't allow any discussion or criticism of CA, especially when it starts getting close to the possibility that CA is not a open forum but actually a cleverly disguised soft sell advertising campaign for the cable industry?

Jon Risch and Cable Asylum are a legitimate topic for discussion and opinion here. Jon Risch has presented papers to the AES expressing his views publicly and he and his web site about cables are often referred to in postings at CA....by himself (a legend in his own mind.) His off the wall ideas and the no DBT policy were reason enough to compare the censorship imposed there to the free and open discussion we enjoyed here up to now. His new policy of apparantly deleting posts which challenge him or his views are reprehensible enough but when THIS message board becomes a feifdom protecting him from any discussion here as well, we have to examine whether or not this is the intent of the people at AR or whether the new commissar of truth has taken it upon himself to tell us what we are free to discuss and what we aren't. If this message gets deleted, it will generate a large number of complaints on the other message boards on this site, to the AR board, and on other sites where the CA goon squad hasn't taken control yet. The censorship here is far more insidious and dangerous to free speech than the anti DBT rule or even the deletions at Cable Asylum. Let's hope it gets nipped in the bud.

[FLZapped]

It's time to volunteer as a moderator....

[TinHere]

The cable debates embody what seperates AR from many other sites. They were certainly not the reason AR declined, but rather what helped to sustain it. Regulars having heated debates and discussions is a far cry from the trolling that pervaded the old boards and led to many people leaving. With the heated cable debates AR thrived. I hope the aim of the change over isn't to eliminate an aspect of AR that kept people coming back. Jon has always been able to defend himself and his positions here even if not to the point of changing minds.

I hope Chris doesn't confuse heated on topic related debate with common nuisance trolling. It would be sad to see a bastion of free speech discussions morphed into what can be found in many other places. The cable forum at AR has always offered something special and different in the audio community, and I hope that continues to be the case. Fancy formats are available in many places, but lively audio debates often give way to a particular board's POV. Tough to find a place where all POV's can be questioned and debated until those involved decide for themselves that the issue is closed for the momment.

[jneutron]

The cable debates embody what seperates AR from many other sites. They were certainly not the reason AR declined, but rather what helped to sustain it. Regulars having heated debates and discussions is a far cry from the trolling that pervaded the old boards and led to many people leaving. With the heated cable debates AR thrived. I hope the aim of the change over isn't to eliminate an aspect of AR that kept people coming back. Jon has always been able to defend himself and his positions here even if not to the point of changing minds.

I hope Chris doesn't confuse heated on topic related debate with common nuisance trolling. It would be sad to see a bastion of free speech discussions morphed into what can be found in many other places. The cable forum at AR has always offered something special and different in the audio community, and I hope that continues to be the case. Fancy formats are available in many places, but lively audio debates often give way to a particular board's POV. Tough to find a place where all POV's can be questioned and debated until those involved decide for themselves that the issue is closed for the momment.

Whadda you know..you probably never eat at Thai USA or Poncho Villa's anyway..Or, god forbid, pop a cold one on Co Co's deck in the summertime...

Seriously, does the moderation group here feel the members want it that way, or is that policy open for discussion?

Cheers, John

[TinHere]

Whadda you know..you probably never eat at Thai USA or Poncho Villa's anyway..Or, god forbid, pop a cold one on Co Co's deck in the summertime...

Seriously, does the moderation group here feel the members want it that way, or is that policy open for discussion?
Cheers, John
Thai USA? Is that a town? I never had a margaritta, and the noise from Coco's never kept me up when I lived on my boat. I think I did see a Shamrock in a haze or two.

I'm not sure what the moderators want, but it does look like things are getting discussed.

Edited addendum:

I took a look at the post over there and my head is spinning. I didn't read the whole thing, much of it could have been in Thai, but I didn't see mention of the power chords used on the testing equiptment. Details John. Maybe that's what makes the older equiptment as capable as the latest technology. An understandable oversite John. Sometimes the big picture gets lost in the minutiae of facts. See? No degree needed, just a willingness to believe. [note to self...Remember when talking to engineers you bought a Yammie with YPAO because using the SPL meter was a daunting task.]

[markw]

I would give it a try. Let all attack jon on the merits of his arguments and tey to keep from getting personal, and hope jon does the same. Remember, this ain't the same as his home field and perhaps therules are different. Let's see.

so, I would suggest that jneutron and the others continue to body check jon. If jon can't delete posts or ban opponents, how long can he last?

If this goes unchecked, then I'd say that chris is trying to get this to a more professional level of discussion than was here previously.

But, if jon contines to get byatch slapped on the merits of others posts, well then, if posts are closed or deleted there is an issue.

Let's give Chris a try on this and try to keep this at a level above "the other".

I do wonder how far jon can continue to be battered by facts from other more knowledgleble and experienced people before he does what a man would do and admit defeat, or at least leave.

[skeptic]

Remember, this ain't the same as his home field and perhaps therules are different.

Jon has two basic problems here.

First he tenaciously argues a point which he cannot support with credible scientific proof or even evidence to suggest that he is right. Neither can anyone else argueing his case.

Secondly, he is a willing tool of the Cable Asylum board to stifle opinions that run counter to the prevailing premise, namely the value of audiophile cables to a fine sound reproduction system. (I have come to what seems to me the only logical conclusion as to why this happens and that is because it serves the financial self interest of the people who sponser that site, the only real reason for its existance.) In this capacity he acts as a censor enforcing their announced anti DBT discussion rule and apparantly, if we can believe some of the postings about it here, actually deleting postings that do not raise the issue of DBTs but for some other reason must be removed.

By combining his highly opinionated stance with his power to delete anything anyone has to say which bothers him, he has become a little tin pot god controlling the entire discussion to suit his own egotistical purposes. The question for this thread is whether or not we find ourselves with our own little tin pot god who will tell us more or less the same thing.

[Pat D]

This has curtailed his activities somewhat. No need to look at censorhip. Fortunately, neither he nor his wife were killed but as I recall she had some injuries, too. A search at AA would probably show more details.

Some people have noted that the computer logic won't accept certain words, so that is a type of censorship, I suppose.

[skeptic]

Some people have noted that the computer logic won't accept certain words, so that is a type of censorship, I suppose.

That is not censorship unless those are words which some people consider unacceptable in polite company such as anglo saxonisms. Then in the strictest sense, technically, you are correct. Otherwise that is a software glitch. However, in the truest and most meaningful sense, as long as there is no banning on the expression of some ideas, there is no real censorship. There are many words which the software will accept to express the same thoughts.

When acting as a censor, Jon Risch is merely a poodle enforcing the policies of the owners and sponsors of his board by restricting discussions to "positive experiences" with cables as Rod put it in his proposed mission statement. If anything happened to him (and I can't imagine why anyone would wish that) there would be an instant replacement which would be equally effective at squashing any real debate.

In one of my rare visits to that Bizzarro world a couple of months ago after a few postings here regarding an unusually vociferous bout there involving the banning of someone named Steve Eddy, I noted that there seemed to be far more flame wars there than here. This points out the falacy of the anti DBT rule effectively preventing such wars. Anyone who comes here making blanket statements about the superiority of some cable or other knows he will be challenged to back it up with more than just an off the cuff endorsement. In other words, shills will be exposed for what they are ususally quickly and unceremoniously by someone like mrtycrafts. So far not only has this served to keep discussions here on a much higher level by far (even if it isn't as technically detailed) than at CA, but it continues to point out the stark contrast between the real nature of the two sites and why this one is of value while the other is worthless (unless you happen to be in the audio cable business.) Will it be allowed to continue that way here? We'll just have to wait and see.

[happy ears]

All depends what is involved with censorship. I do agree that insults should be limited however debating should not. I will stand by my belief that cables do make a difference, not a big difference but it is there. Some better some worse, other people may agree or disagree. Cannot not prove this and have no desire to, I hear a difference and that is all I have to stand by. I will let others prove or disprove what I hear.

The only posts which should be deleted are those that are offensive or insulting in nature. I do not consider debating an issue to be offensive or insulting. We each have our own opinions and beliefs and a right to discuss it. So happy debating and keep the punches above the beltline.

[skeptic]

I do agree that insults should be limited however debating should not.

The only posts which should be deleted are those that are offensive or insulting in nature. I do not consider debating an issue to be offensive or insulting. We each have our own opinions and beliefs and a right to discuss it.

And what kind of insult do you consider it when one debator takes it upon himself to put a gag in someone elses mouth by deleting his posts because he also happens to be the moderator? What kind of reply to that kind of offensiveness exceeds the bounds which you would impose, especially when the victim has no recourse except to complain on another bulletin board where the offender doesn't excercise that kind of control? It is perfectly understandable to me when people who have been the victims of this tyrant at the other board come here to hurl their insults at him for his outrages, especially when there is a commonality of people who post at both sites.

If someone is being unjustly insulted for no justifiable reason, then the rest of the community will jump on him and let him know that what he says is unacceptable. But when those insults are the only possible reply to repression of the kind of expression of opinions and beliefs you say they have a right to discuss, then that seems perfectly proper to me. Furthermore, when someone who abuses other peopes' privelege of free and open discussion he enjoyed on a far greater scale which allowed him to achieve the education which has brought him professional stature, and material comforts of life, he deserves all the abuse his victims care to hurl at him and far more. I for one am offended that he claims the title of engineer at all. He gets no more respect from me than a doctor working for the Nazi's would get performing experiments on human beings would get from other doctors with even a shred of ethics or morals.

[happy ears]

I have to agree with you on this, it is very dangerous to be both the moderator and the debater. Although I consider myself to be an honest and forthright person, I have to acknowledge that having a bad day at the office or with ones partner in life, just might be enough to retaliate against someone else. Using the forum to take out my frustrations on someone else that does not have the same power that I have is not acceptable, but this is human nature. This alone makes it dangerous to be both the moderator and debater, one may think that they are perfect, but lets not fool ourselves and others.

Deleting someone’s reply in a disagreement is unprofessional and unacceptable. This to me shows a lack in maturity or respect in others beliefs because they disagree with you. We do not have to agree with someone on any issue, but we should respect their beliefs no matter what that is. We may not understand it, but you most remember that it is their beliefs not ours. This is much easier to say than it is to do, that human nature problem again.

There are many reasons why one should not be a moderator and a debater on the same issues. Very few of use will be able to meet the standards that this will require. So to prevent conflict in ones requirement, the best would be to avoid the temptations and problems associated with it. There is little one can do when the cards are stacked against you, *****ing does help but it does not solve the problem. I would think that when a problem like this occurs, the members should be allowed to vote to force the guilty party to be either the moderator or the debater but not both. I will even allow the person to choose which one they prefer. The members should also be allowed to vote if there is a problem with a moderators enforcement of the rules. When your are the policemen you do not get to decide what crimes will be punished, this to is much more difficult then most people realize. Hopefully these type of problems will be in the minority and not a common problem.

Have A Great Day and enjoy the music, life is to short.

Note: Remember to bring field stereo for these longer jobs.

Happy Ears

[skeptic]

On a message board, the power to delete postings and ban a participant is the power of life and death, the moderator being judge, jury and executioner. A message board is not a democracy, it is a protected site under the control of the owner for a specific purpose, namely advertising products to generate profits for someone. How heavy handed the owner is in controlling debate determines whether or not the site is of any potential value to the participants. In the case of AR up to now, the moderators have taken a largely hands off approach allowing debate to flow freely wherever it might go and only stepping in when it became obvious that postings had far exceeded all reasonable bounds of civility. That is one of the main reasons it is valuable and successful IMO, and even I click on the advertising sites from time to time to see what is on offer. With the closing of the posting discussing Jon Risch and the new moderator stating that discussion of another site, its policies, and the statements and actions of its moderator were off bounds for discussion here, it was exhibiting exactly the same kind of control over debate that Jon exercises at his site. Why would this happen? We have to ask why someone would want to limit discussion of another site. Is it to protect that site from criticism? Why? Has this site been infiltrated by a censor from that site? Is this moderator or someone directing him in collusion with the other site? No answers but a lot of conjecture and suspicion. So far the lock on that thread has remained however, the discussion has moved to this thread and so far it has not been locked...yet! Does this mean that the moderator of this board has had second thoughts about what he did? Does it mean that he is acting alone as a mole and doesn't want to risk showing his hand too strongly too soon? No answers but a lot of questions. I'll be watching and if you value this site, every one of you will be watching too and screaming if things change.

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

And seeing there is moderation in place what is the big surprise that this power would be used? If you don't like it take your concerns up with them and if you're still not happy you can always go elsewhere. Personally, I see no place for the discussion, or the degree of discussion, of personalities within any of the specific forums. The sub-title for this forum is "Cables and Interconnects - discuss them here.", not Peyton Place. Try the "Non-Audio" forum for your personal gripes of individuals or other audio forums.

I moderate another audio forum and wouldn't appreciate anyone continually bashing another person, whether they were a member or not. And that goes for other forums as well. Take your compliants to the source directly, don't bring them to "my house". The forum I host involves discussion related to Tube Audio. Non-related disussion should be directed toward the General or Off-Topic forums. Instead of censorship [how dramatic] I've relied on contacting individuals off-line asking them to either re-direct their discussion or to keep the debate "on topic" without personal attacks. I'm not interested in what happens on other forums, my desire is to keep the discussion civil and topic related. I'm not a fortune teller but perhaps that is the reason Chris chose to lock the thread in question.

As for moderators also being contributors. Most of our moderators are also our most prolific members. And while I do not always agree with how everyone runs "their ship" I focus on what happens within my one forum, while sharing my other concerns "off-line". And due to the quality of our membership I've not had to resort to the use of "administrative control" during my term. Like anyone else, some days treat me better than others but accepting my greater responsibility to our readership I choose my words and actions with respect for others.

MikE

[skeptic]

I moderate another audio forum and wouldn't appreciate anyone continually bashing another person, whether they were a member or not. And that goes for other forums as well. Take your compliants to the source directly, don't bring them to "my house".

First of all, you clearly are biased in favor of moderators having the right to use their powers of censorship without challenge by participants on their own board or anywhere else. You think that you and your counterparts should be beyond criticism for your actions not only in your own little kingdom of Audio Kharma but here and anywhere else as well. You think you are beyond the right to be held up to scrutiny or accountable in public by other people if you unfairly use your powers to enforce unreasoned censorship. You are WRONG.

I have taken my complaint directly to the source. This board. I have stated my position clearly, that being that if censorship to the extent that any civil discourse about anything including the actions of other moderators of other boards including Jon Risch or yourself is out of bounds, then the rules are no longer acceptable to me and I'll leave. But everyone should know why and decide for themselves if that is the kind of new limitations they want to put up with. I see no reason to divert my comments to another board on this site where the participants who are directly involved with it might not see it. I don't go to the General board EVER myself and I wouldn't expect anyone here to look for my comments there.

I occasionally post on your site and even on your board under a different moniker. But it isn't one tenth as interesting or stimulating as this one because the back and forth exchange is far more limited although I don't know the reason why. That's what's in jeaopardy here right now.

I don't have any problem with a moderator also being a contributor but he must keep the two roles separate and not unfairly use his singular and absolute powers to skew the discussion or debate because he has no other way of advocating his point of view. But that is just what Jon Risch has apparantly done if the reports we are getting on the other thread that was locked are right. He is not merely enforcing a one sided rule which puts completely free and open discussion out of bounds, but he is now deleting entire posts which have nothing to do with his anti DBT rule because he can't refute them.

If you don't like my posts or those like it, don't read them. Bashing is a perjorative term which infers that an individual is being unfairly attacked for actions he didn't take or are being described in exaggerated or untrue ways. Nothing could be further from the truth. The actions, whether the moderator of this board or of any other so far being discussed, have been written about in objective terms and the opinions seem fair and reasoned to me. I know that you largely agree with Jon Risch's opinions on cables and you play the same role on your board, he plays on his. Therefore your sympathy for him is understandable. What will you do if I decide to come to your board and advance an arguement about my rejection of vacuum tube amplifiers as a cult retro phenomenon being exploited as a niche market with outrageously priced ancient designs, delete me too?

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

You make me laugh with your presumptions and attitude. You pretend to know what my motives are based on what responsibilities I have on another forum. I'm not pro-moderation and I see my role there as host not as some demigod. I could care less if that were incorporated here or any forum I choose to visit. As long as people are respecful. If that should change I would probably find another forum, than simply b!tch out loud. Either lead by example, join the administration [where you can affect change] or just go. Anything else is blowing hot air for no purpose than to hear an echo.

The forums are seperated for a reason, if you choose not to repect that then you come under the same scrutiny as those you wish to hold to a higher standard. There is a word for that.

My post or the discussion has nothing to do with anyone's preference of audio sites. Like the "new AR", if you don't like it than don't go there.

All your kind and Jon are doing is arguing amongst yourselves. It has little to do with the major or the subject at hand. Which is fine but should be re-directed to a non-audio forum.

I never said I didn't like your posts, and read posts like them for my amusement. Though, my reply wasn't directed at you, instead the broader subject - moderation. You just took it as such judging by your reply.

Sympathy for Jon? Please, I don't like the guy let alone feel for the role he has adopted.

As for my moderating style? There is a new poster that is generating alot of discussion at AK, and has even posted in my forum. As I told the other mods, I'm not so quick to judge him or concern myself with his motives. I'll ignore him as long as he doesn't become uncivil. Fools are not excluded from posting on any public forum. And no, that was not directed at you.

MikE

[skeptic]

Actually, I enjoy reading your posts too. Hope your new Moth amp is meeting your expectations. Sorry if I over-reacted. It just annoyed me that the other post was locked up for no legitimate reason. Bruce would never have done that. I hope Chris has had second thoughts about it himself.

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

MikE.

[Norm Strong]

The fact of the matter is that the moderator should never post in the forum he moderates. You're either a participant or a judge--but not both.

[tentoze]

The fact of the matter is that the moderator should never post in the forum he moderates. You're either a participant or a judge--but not both.

Regardless of the topic of the particular discussion here, I have to say "hogwash" to that statement. I've hung around discussion groups for a few years (pre-dating the Internet, even) and moderators have never been excluded from participation. Silly statement, with no historical basis. Forum moderators are not Oracles from Delphi, sport.

[spacedeckman]

Why can't a moderator post. If a moderator has interest in what is going on, they can add a lot to the conversation. Seems silly...almost like...CENSORSHIP...but it isn't....right?

Civil discussions are cool. I may disagree with every one of your sorry backsides, but I'm not going to call you an idiot, moron, Nazi, Commie, question your masculinity/femininity, tell you that you are becoming a metros@*ual, ask who does your nails, or anything else. That is nothing but bullying and takes away from the reason many people come here. Heated debate is even cooler, but it doesn't have to get personal. Moderators are there to limit the destructive elements. Maybe what they should do is act like a teacher and send the post back to you for correction.

I left a year or so ago because of the incessant personal attacks and personal bickering was starting to overshadow the whole point of having a forum. I got bored. I came back to see if it had changed. Not really. The whole concept of freedom of speech is that you are allowed to say what you want, you are not freed from the responsibilities attached to what you say, nor the repercussions. And I don't have to listen either.

This is starting to sound too much like the presidential debates with 9 people picking on someone else, but not adding anything to the debate. It's okay to be aggressive, just remember to keep the personal attacks out of it.

Now go out and play...nicely with others

Space

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

Well said. I'll admit that mixing moderating with active participation has it's downside, but as mentioned our contributions stand [or fall] on the integrity and insight of the individual behind the mask/monikor.

MikE

[skeptic]

our contributions stand [or fall] on the integrity and insight of the individual behind the mask/monikor.
MikE

And if that's all there is to it, you are absolutely correct. But when the moderator uses his power to delete postings that he can't refute by logical (or illogical) arguement, this is intellectually 100% disingenuous and an outrageous abuse of his power. And according to the reports in the locked thread, that is exactly what Jon Risch did at CA and would presumably do anywhere else he had the power. That makes it absurd for anyone IMO to go there to discuss anything or look for objective debate and decide for yourself based solely on the strenght of the arguements. But then if you do decide to go there anyway, it's your nickel.

[Steve Eddy]

Having myself been banned from Cable Asylum and the last person on this planet who would ever kiss Jon's ass, I have to say again that I think that those of you who believe that Jon and Rod are part of some cable industry conspiracy are just as wacked as Jon is.

It's really quite simple. Jon is a megalomaniac and Rod ain't got no balls. That's it. There is no sanctuary. There is no conspiracy.

And if anyone cares to reply to this post, don't expect a response any time soon. This place is still a slug. Granted, I'm only at 28.8, but this place is inexcusable.

I've found diyAudio.com to be the best game in town. It's what Rod once claimed was his vision for Audio Asylum. While it's actively moderated, the moderators are more than fair and they don't discriminate based on their own political dogma or what your name happens to be (i.e. John Curl).

se

[skeptic]

And if anyone cares to reply to this post, don't expect a response any time soon. This place is still a slug. Granted, I'm only at 28.8, but this place is inexcusable.


As I said the last time the wicked witch of the North flitted in, sprayed his scent, and flew off saying he wouldn't be back, no loss as far as I'm concerned.

He's got 28.8 and calls this place a slug? What a laugh! Wadya expect from someone who's got two first names?

[happy ears]

It is good to hear that most moderators do not have a problem being a debater. As long as they keep the two functions separated there should not be a problem. However when they use the power as the moderator to their advantage this becomes underhanded and unacceptable. If this is the exemption we will have to live with it but if it gets out of hand something should be down. Hopefully we will not have to deal with the latter.

Endless flame wars and name calling achieves nothing for anyone involved with this site. Well maybe some humor at the expense of the debaters. Limiting cable discussions to positive experiences is not debating or discussing an issue, this is a forum for discussions. If I am allowed to comment on my positive experiences I will also comment on my negative experiences, as well as when I note no differences. Anyone that makes blanket statements tend to raise red flags, also anyone that keep pushing one manufacture’s name and product is also suspect.

As I have noted and stated that I have found some differences with interconnects, some better some worse and at other times no differences between similar products. As well, I attempt to explain testing procedures that where used. Using the tape out on my integrated amplifier has a larger affect than the cables do. I suspect that there is an operational amplifier in this circuit and I use the word suspect as I have never opened it and checked.

Now, if I am to explain why these differences exist, we will need a front end loader because a shovel will be tool small to clean up all the bs. Having a grade 9 electricity course that I took 30 years ago does not make me qualified to offer an explanation. I have read some information on this topic, some of it makes sense at times, most of it is above my level of understanding and some of it sounds like bs. At my limited level of knowledge on this topic I do not appreciate reading garbage, it wastes my time!

I also understand that many people will not hear the differences that I do, there can be many reasons for this. First off they might not hear the differences, do not care about the differences or are unwilling to pay for the differences. I have never considered myself to have golden ears, if I did some thief would steal them. I do believe that I hear the differences, as other audio nuts like me tend to hear similar differences and this is a very vague statement. I wish I didn’t hear the differences as small as they an be at times or learn not to chase audio nirvana.

Have to agree with you, how can 3 feet of shielded power cord affect the sound of any audio component. I can understand shielded interconnects with there low level signals, but not power cords. There is 25 feet of standard electrical cable between the circuit breaker panel and the plug my stereo is plugged into. In fact, I only tried this when I noticed my MGE UPS used shielded SJT 14/3 power cord. Did not notice any change in sound using a shielded power cord on my CD player. However, using different power cords on my integrated amplifier did show some differences but this may not all be the result of the shield. Mentioned this to my friend and again he had some choice words to explain what I told him, come on over and see for yourself. We preformed a simple test, I just plugged in three different power cords into the integrated amplifier, he could not see what cord. The stock cord was 16/3 SJT, the UPS power cord shielded SJT 14/3 and one from an audio store 12/3. He guessed all three cords by the sound and even commented that he thought the stock cord know sounded substandard, yet the week earlier he thought it sounded fine. The most distinct difference that was noted that when there was no music being played the background sounded darker (blacker) never understood this statement previously. Playing music seamed to have the affect of being faster and more accurate, the difference between the MGE shielded power cord and the exotic audio store cable was small. These differences could be the result of the heavier gauge wires used in each power cord or a combination of the heavier gauge and better shielding. Should there be a difference, not with my limited knowledge always believed wire was wire, is it not. You want an explanation you better get a big shovel, a powered shovel would work the best

Then the price subject was discussed, his reply was that he could justify the cost increase between the stock cable and the MGE shielded power cord. However, he could not justify the tenfold increase for the exotic audio power cord, although it was the best, the price did not justify the improvement. So now again we have noted differences with the integrated amplifier and no differences with the CD player. Positive and negative results, will they work for you. My answer there is maybe, will it be better or worse maybe, will it work with all my components it didn’t for me. Is it worth the money, I have always stated fancy audio cables are grossly overpriced. Can I justify the price of the MGE power cord, yep no problem there finding them is the biggest job. And, as always if you do not hear a difference do not spend your money, this applies to spending ten a hundred or a thousand dollars. I still will recommend purchasing Radio Shack interconnect over what is supplied with stock equipment, reliability is an issue with me. Cables can make a small difference not always for the better but a difference, is it worth the price not for what they are asking for the fancy stuff. Chop the price by a factor of five or tens times and I will say maybe. I do not know why, it should not be, how is this possible. You want a explanation you will have to tell me first how big is the powered shovel you plan to use, because it will be bs and only bs. Has anyone else noted changes be they better, worse or none at all. Gee, another long winded reply, damn need some days off or a change in location. Snowing ever day or two is becoming a pain in the ass and it is cold to boot.

Have A Great Day and enjoy the music, life is to short.

Happy Ears

[skeptic]

It seems to me that I always have to give the same advice again and again over time because maybe some people didn't read it the times before. IF you want the PERFECT power cable, (I don't recommend diy projects for power cables so have a qualified tech or electrician do it) make it out of the same wire your house is wired with, Romex for most homes, BX for some. It is also among the cheapest material to obtain. Now if you are truely crazy and are going to tell me that you think the outlet is affecting your sound system, have the same electrician hard wire it instead of using a plug. You could get a 20 amp wall switch, 60 or even a 100 amp safety switch and only the hot leg is switched. The neutral is either wire nutted or screwed to a terminal block. Now if you can relocate your equipment so that it is 3 or 4 feet closer upstream to your circuit breaker panel than you are now, you will have ELIMINATED the power cord completely compared to what you have now. Why don't cable manufacturers make their audiophile cables out of Romex? Because everybody knows exactly what it is and you can't charge an arm and a leg for it.

[happy ears]

Oops, sorry about that guys wrong post, must be a scientist.

Need an Electrician to hook up detachable power cords? Should we not call the dealership when we have a flat tire and only use licensed mechanics to install our spare, this is also a safety issue. Buy my electrical outlets at Home Depot, but I guess I could save some money by checking Walmart. Usually very busy store, got to give them credit on there advertising and success.

Have A Great Day

[skeptic]

I have to put in a disclaimer. I have no control over what you or anyone else does. I wouldn't want anyone to ever be able to say I told him to do something and it resulted in an injury or worse because they weren't qualified to do it.

However, if you get done what I told you, it will technically outperform any cable you can buy, which is to say it won't make a hill of beans difference to what you already have now IMO. Of course, it's your money so I can't stop you from throwing it away either. OTOH, maybe some poor shnook who was thinking about taking your advice and going out to buy one will give it a second thought and realize just how stupid it really is.

[Jim Clark]

You guys crack me up. So this nonsense thread is in response to the locking of another nonsense thread? Wow.

Keep up the great work guys.

jc

[Chris]

Apparantly the format isn't the only thing that has changed here In the past, this has been a very free and open place to discuss just about anything people who post care to including those subjects not related to cables. Even flame wars including anglo saxonisms were tolerated to a degree and allowed to burn themselves out. It was only a couple of years ago that anyone even had to register to post here. Many of the people who post here post at other audio related sites including Cable Asylum. That goes for Jon Risch as well. He used to post here frequently. I don't know if he just tired of this place, has been too busy with being moderator of Cable Asylum, or felt his views were too discredited to show his face very often but he apparantly still makes a rare appearance here. Because of the number of people who do post there or those who left there and come here as a real refuge to a place of free expression, there is still a lot of interest about what goes on there, although not by me. I was only there for a very brief time several years ago, left in disgust quickly and never established any attachment or interest in it.

Well now it seems that by locking a thread and telling people who post here that discussion of that site and their moderator is off limits, censorship has arrived here and their actions cannot be criticized without meeting the approval of our own new censor in chief. Is it the approaching Thanksgiving holiday or has this new ominous element put a chill in what was ordinarily a very active message board.

If it continues and it becomes apparant that we must watch our words because we have our own new Communist Gestapo censor to deal with, I am outta here. And that means all the boards. No more advice or counseling to newbies about speakers, amplifiers, phonograph cartridges or recordings. That would make this not the kind of place I would frequent. And unlike some others, if I leave, I for one am NEVER coming back under this moniker or any other.
It's too bad that I didn't see this thread before I went on my holiday vacation, or I would have answered it quickly before it started. Let me make a few points and challenge your accusations.

Let me first ask why the first hint of any type of moderation on this site should bring about cries of censorship, communism or conspiracy? What used to be a VERY active community (here on AudioReview) has become home to numerous trolls and flamebait for the past couple of years because there had been almost no moderating. The first attempt in two years to clean up the discussions and try to get this forum back to the "audio-related" subjects that made it so great in the first place draws this type of harsh criticism? I'm a little disappointed.

If everyone kept to giving "advice or counseling to newbies about speakers, amplifiers, phonograph cartridges or recordings", there would be no need for moderating at all. Unfortunately, we all know that is not realistic, and that people will push the limits of appropriate discussion in a PRIVATE forum such as ours. Yes, it's true, we will be drawing the lines a little more as to what is acceptable behavior in our forums, as we used to do back when Norbert was running things. We will not censor anyone, but we will delete or lock inappropriate threads and posts that we do find cross the line. All it takes is a little common sense and respect - something that should have been used anyway. It should go without saying, but I guess if you don't say it, people will not use it.

About the thread that was locked - I locked it because it had gone on long enough, and people were complaining about it. Yes, other members were complaining about it, so I chose to lock it. If you want to debate a topic, that's fine. But we would rather people not go to great lengths to try and discredit another site, or other people here on our site. When other members begin complaining, it's obvious that the members have decided it's gone on long enough. We allowed it to take place, but it kept degrading. We would like to increase the quality level around here, and flaming will be a little less tolerated. I personally don't know enough about how Cable Asylum is run, but I don't think it's right for us to allow an ongoing flame session on their policies - do you? If you don't like their site, don't use it. But why use up our forum resources to complain about their policies or ethics? It won't solve anything will it?

[jneutron]

What used to be a VERY active community (here on AudioReview) has become home to numerous trolls and flamebait for the past couple of years because there had been almost no moderating. The first attempt in two years to clean up the discussions and try to get this forum back to the "audio-related" subjects that made it so great in the first place draws this type of harsh criticism? I'm a little disappointed.
Yes, it's true, we will be drawing the lines a little more as to what is acceptable behavior in our forums, as we used to do back when Norbert was running things. We will not censor anyone, but we will delete or lock inappropriate threads and posts that we do find cross the line. All it takes is a little common sense and respect - something that should have been used anyway. It should go without saying, but I guess if you don't say it, people will not use it.

About the thread that was locked - I locked it because it had gone on long enough, and people were complaining about it. Yes, other members were complaining about it, so I chose to lock it. If you want to debate a topic, that's fine. But we would rather people not go to great lengths to try and discredit another site, or other people here on our site. When other members begin complaining, it's obvious that the members have decided it's gone on long enough. We allowed it to take place, but it kept degrading. We would like to increase the quality level around here, and flaming will be a little less tolerated. I personally don't know enough about how Cable Asylum is run, but I don't think it's right for us to allow an ongoing flame session on their policies - do you? If you don't like their site, don't use it. But why use up our forum resources to complain about their policies or ethics? It won't solve anything will it?

Hmmm...I do see the huge number of problems in general, but not in cables....

You said, on the thread you locked out...."I feel it has gone on long enough"...not "others were complaining".. That is something else entirely..now...is there a threshold of complaints, or is it moderator's choice?? if 12 people are active and two others complain, does it get shut down?? If John Curl complains, does he carry more weight? Did more complain about your lockout than the thread itself?

Start of thread: 11-20-2003 8:55 PM
Shutdown: 11-24-2003 7:52 PM.

Four days doesn't seem long..

Never having seen moderation here, I think it would be nice to know the new rules in advance.

Yes, it is a private website, and can be run anyway the owners wish..I will abide with the owners, but would certainly like to see freedom to speak, within socially accepted norms..

I personally think you acted too hastily...but do not envy you your choices.

Cheers, John

[skeptic]

Let me first ask why the first hint of any type of moderation on this site should bring about cries of censorship, communism or conspiracy? What used to be a VERY active community (here on AudioReview) has become home to numerous trolls and flamebait for the past couple of years because there had been almost no moderating. .

Yes, it's true, we will be drawing the lines a little more as to what is acceptable behavior in our forums, as we used to do back when Norbert was running things. We will not censor anyone, but we will delete or lock inappropriate threads and posts that we do find cross the line.

About the thread that was locked - I locked it because it had gone on long enough, and people were complaining about it. Yes, other members were complaining about it, so I chose to lock it. If you want to debate a topic, that's fine. But we would rather people not go to great lengths to try and discredit another site, or other people here on our site.

We would like to increase the quality level around here, and flaming will be a little less tolerated. I personally don't know enough about how Cable Asylum is run, but I don't think it's right for us to allow an ongoing flame session on their policies - do you?

But why use up our forum resources to complain about their policies or ethics? It won't solve anything will it?

The first thing to understand as I pointed out is that there are a lot of people who post at both sites, and more than a few like me who once posted at the other site and gave it up because the censorship there was not merely restrictive but so unfairly biased that it made it obvious that the site was used to promulgate a particular point of view at least IMO was for the purpose of commercial exploitation of the participants. Therefore some of us, me for one, is very alert and sensitive to any indication that this site is headed in the same direction.

This is still a very active community and when trolls do visit here, one or more of the regular members identifies him/her as a troll and they are quickly dispatched. Some of us think Burce was a very good moderator. Now who's flame throwing?

I for one will be watching to see exactly where and how the lines are drawn and I will make my decision of whether or not to continue to participate based on it.

People who make public pronouncements, especially public personna who have credentials, published papers, technical websites, and moderate a well known board will be open to public comment and scrutiny and will be judged by their actions and what they say, if not here than elsewhere. Nobody is beyond criticism, especially when it is justified and even the Queen of England can't stop people from talking about her family. This is human nature.

The quality here is very high already. With over 1000 participants reading some postings, there are bound to be some people who will disagree with most or all of them and when the topic is controversial, there will be some who will also complain. Those are generally the most interesting and stimulating discussions. There is no requrement that anyone read every message on every thread. And people will say things in the heat of disagreement that they might reconsider later however, this is part of the spontaniety that makes this place as good as it is. Stiffling every discussions because someone's feelings might get a little hurt, even someone who doesn't often visit here could make this a very boring place.

Therefore, IMO, Cable Asylum their policies and the actions of their moderator are a legitimate topic for conversation here especially when some of the people who post at both sites have something to say about it and the way they were treated there but are not allowed to post there. Are you suggesting that they have not voice here either?

Use up fourm resources? Are you serious? How many terrabytes of space are available. Which grain of sand on the beach is missing, which droplet of water in the ocean is gone from the endless capacity for messages at this site?

[TinHere]

It's too bad that I didn't see this thread before I went on my holiday vacation, or I would have answered it quickly before it started. Let me make a few points and challenge your accusations.

Let me first ask why the first hint of any type of moderation on this site should bring about cries of censorship, communism or conspiracy? What used to be a VERY active community (here on AudioReview) has become home to numerous trolls and flamebait for the past couple of years because there had been almost no moderating. The first attempt in two years to clean up the discussions and try to get this forum back to the "audio-related" subjects that made it so great in the first place draws this type of harsh criticism? I'm a little disappointed.

If everyone kept to giving "advice or counseling to newbies about speakers, amplifiers, phonograph cartridges or recordings", there would be no need for moderating at all. Unfortunately, we all know that is not realistic, and that people will push the limits of appropriate discussion in a PRIVATE forum such as ours. Yes, it's true, we will be drawing the lines a little more as to what is acceptable behavior in our forums, as we used to do back when Norbert was running things. We will not censor anyone, but we will delete or lock inappropriate threads and posts that we do find cross the line. All it takes is a little common sense and respect - something that should have been used anyway. It should go without saying, but I guess if you don't say it, people will not use it.

About the thread that was locked - I locked it because it had gone on long enough, and people were complaining about it. Yes, other members were complaining about it, so I chose to lock it. If you want to debate a topic, that's fine. But we would rather people not go to great lengths to try and discredit another site, or other people here on our site. When other members begin complaining, it's obvious that the members have decided it's gone on long enough. We allowed it to take place, but it kept degrading. We would like to increase the quality level around here, and flaming will be a little less tolerated. I personally don't know enough about how Cable Asylum is run, but I don't think it's right for us to allow an ongoing flame session on their policies - do you? If you don't like their site, don't use it. But why use up our forum resources to complain about their policies or ethics? It won't solve anything will it?

I hope the stalwarts, who have remained here for good times and bad, are allowed to discuss the topics they deem relevant. I think that a term such as "Nazi" should be self censored as it trivializes what it really represents, otherwise posts that express rancor about a topic that concerns the audio community, and not just this site, should be allowed. We're all in same building just in different rooms by the choices we make. Lively debate has been the cornerstone here. There are many places to go to preach to the choir and discuss the "benefits" of what is questioned here. I hope this site doesn't dissolve into the amalgam that constitutes most of the other sites and retains it's identity of a place where almost anything can be disscussed and nothing is accepted as truth without the recourse of debate. Demanding proof and questioning claims is a valuable lesson for anyone starting in this pursuit unaware that there are two schools of thought. I realize your aim isn't to stifle debate, but without knowledgable people discussing the issues there is little to be learned. I hope they are given the leeway they have asked for, and moderation is saved for the "sublimely abhorrent".

[Chris]

I hope the stalwarts, who have remained here for good times and bad, are allowed to discuss the topics they deem relevant. I think that a term such as "Nazi" should be self censored as it trivializes what it really represents, otherwise posts that express rancor about a topic that concerns the audio community, and not just this site, should be allowed. We're all in same building just in different rooms by the choices we make. Lively debate has been the cornerstone here. There are many places to go to preach to the choir and discuss the "benefits" of what is questioned here. I hope this site doesn't dissolve into the amalgam that constitutes most of the other sites and retains it's identity of a place where almost anything can be disscussed and nothing is accepted as truth without the recourse of debate. Demanding proof and questioning claims is a valuable lesson for anyone starting in this pursuit unaware that there are two schools of thought. I realize your aim isn't to stifle debate, but without knowledgable people discussing the issues there is little to be learned. I hope they are given the leeway they have asked for, and moderation is saved for the "sublimely abhorrent".
We are not looking to stifle debate, but we would like to minimize the side effects of debates - those being the flame wars and personal attacks that have plagued our forum for some time now. We will not attempt to dictate the subject matter, but we would like it to pertain to audio/video if it's posted in the A/V forums, and we would like people to use common sense and use maturity/appropriate behavior. As I said, this should go without saying, we obviously need to say it.

[skeptic]

I think that a term such as "Nazi" should be self censored as it trivializes what it really represents, otherwise posts that express rancor about a topic that concerns the audio community, and not just this site, should be allowed.

As I said, I chose this word very carefully and I understand its full implications and signifigance. It is an historical fact that the totalitarian method for surpressing intellectual challenge to its dogma is to both control the means of production and dissemination of opinion using it to promulgate it own point of view relentlessly and imposing total censorship on all other points of view. Those who dare to speak out are not merely not allowed to speak but are punished in every other conceivable way the authorities have available to them. In Nazi Germany it meant the gestapo hauling the offender off to a concintration camp to meet a sorry fate. In Soviet Russia and other communist countries, it meant a visit from the MVD (state security) who would assist the offender's tranisit to the Gualg Archipelligo (must reading for understanding the 20th century.) All dissent no matter how seemingly innocent is viewed as a challenge to The State's authority and is treated as an act of open revolt. At Cable Asylum dissent results in a warning followed by banishment which in the sense of being able to participate in debate means the same thing. Yes this is a very powerful word with a very powerful message. And it is the correct message as far as I am concerned and when I can no longer express it here, I'm leaving since this place will have become no better than the other one.

[Chris]

The first thing to understand as I pointed out is that there are a lot of people who post at both sites, and more than a few like me who once posted at the other site and gave it up because the censorship there was not merely restrictive but so unfairly biased that it made it obvious that the site was used to promulgate a particular point of view at least IMO was for the purpose of commercial exploitation of the participants. Therefore some of us, me for one, is very alert and sensitive to any indication that this site is headed in the same direction.The one good thing about me (the admin of this site) having limited knowledge of home audio, is that you don't have to worry about me forcing any point of view or being biased toward any audio theories. The only thing I will try to keep out of these forums is inappropriate behavior including flaming, personal attacks, and people who visit here only to cause trouble (trolls).

This is still a very active community and when trolls do visit here, one or more of the regular members identifies him/her as a troll and they are quickly dispatched. Some of us think Burce was a very good moderator. Now who's flame throwing?

I for one will be watching to see exactly where and how the lines are drawn and I will make my decision of whether or not to continue to participate based on it.Understood.

People who make public pronouncements, especially public personna who have credentials, published papers, technical websites, and moderate a well known board will be open to public comment and scrutiny and will be judged by their actions and what they say, if not here than elsewhere. Nobody is beyond criticism, especially when it is justified and even the Queen of England can't stop people from talking about her family. This is human nature.

The quality here is very high already. With over 1000 participants reading some postings, there are bound to be some people who will disagree with most or all of them and when the topic is controversial, there will be some who will also complain. Those are generally the most interesting and stimulating discussions. There is no requrement that anyone read every message on every thread. And people will say things in the heat of disagreement that they might reconsider later however, this is part of the spontaniety that makes this place as good as it is. Stiffling every discussions because someone's feelings might get a little hurt, even someone who doesn't often visit here could make this a very boring place.I unerstand what you're saying. We won't be stifling every discussion where feelings get hurt, but we also won't allow some of the flaming and personal attacks that have filled this place up in the past. We would rather see people act a bit more civil, and stick to the subject matter, instead of flaming others.

Therefore, IMO, Cable Asylum their policies and the actions of their moderator are a legitimate topic for conversation here especially when some of the people who post at both sites have something to say about it and the way they were treated there but are not allowed to post there. Are you suggesting that they have not voice here either?

Use up fourm resources? Are you serious? How many terrabytes of space are available. Which grain of sand on the beach is missing, which droplet of water in the ocean is gone from the endless capacity for messages at this site?When I said forum resources, I was referring to hits on the database, not space. When 20 people post at the same time, it uses up system resources, making the forums work harder/move slower. So I wasn't making it up.

It's understandable that some people may want to vent their displeasure about the way they were treated on another audio site, but please keep in mind that we don't want to be the place where everyone goes to complain about their experience on other audio sites. Can you blame us? I figured closing down that particular thread would make a statement and would get people to move on. All we ask is that you keep these posts to a minimum, and keep the majority of the discussions focused on the forum's subject matter. Fair enough?

[skeptic]

It's understandable that some people may want to vent their displeasure about the way they were treated on another audio site, but please keep in mind that we don't want to be the place where everyone goes to complain about their experience on other audio sites. Can you blame us? I figured closing down that particular thread would make a statement and would get people to move on. All we ask is that you keep these posts to a minimum, and keep the majority of the discussions focused on the forum's subject matter. Fair enough?

This topic comes up briefly every few months when someone from the other board who posts here too or someone who follows that board posts about something unusual or particularly outrageous that happened there. There is a brief flurry of discussion and then it dies not to be seen again for months and months. The thread you locked was just about dead and the subject was probably exhausted had you just left it alone.

It might interest you to know that John Neutron only came here a few months ago after a particularly sharp confrontation at the other site. Some of our other participants such as PC Tower came previously for similar reasons. While I personally was not banished or even warned about my postings, it was quickly clear to me that it was not the kind of place I'd stick around in. People who left there for here or post on both boards are among the most frequent and best informed participants of this board.

There is a lot more to life than audio cables and the culture of this message board has been that people feel free to discuss more than just this one narrow topic. That is one of the reasons why it is so successful. Don't try to fix it if it ain't broke.

[Chris]

There is a lot more to life than audio cables and the culture of this message board has been that people feel free to discuss more than just this one narrow topic. That is one of the reasons why it is so successful. Don't try to fix it if it ain't broke.
I've been with the company for over 4 years now and have watched the AudioReview forum participation drop significantly over the past couple of years. I'd say there's a little room for improvement. Yes, I agree that is successful overall, but it needs a little help to regain its old form.


"Don't try to fix it if it ain't broke" .
This statement would have carried more weight if the quality of discussions and the traffic levels hadn't proven otherwise. We have specific forums for specific subject matter in hopes to group similar discussions together. We now have a forum dedicated to non-related topics for those who want to go off topic. I'm hoping that will satisfy people who need to talk about other topics. That should keep the technical forums more focused.

Overall, I think we're on the same page.

[DMK]

when I can no longer express it here, I'm leaving since this place will have become no better than the other one.

First of all, in response also to your original post on this thread, I find much to disagree with in your posts, particularly those concerned with music. But that pales in comparison to the disagreement I would have were you not allowed to post what you believe. That "other" audio board is run PRECISELY the way I do NOT want to see this one run. The moderator runs his ship exactly as you posted. He posts things as facts that fly in the face of science. As such, he opens himself up to scrutiny on A/R. That said, I choose not to engage in further discussions on A/R as to what he does on his own board. That's his problem and that of his followers. But when he comes to A/R, he's fair game.

Chris, if Skeptic and others are stifled here, I will follow them out. I'm taking you at your word below that that is not your intent. As Skeptic says, this forum ain't broke. It's the one place people can go to get BOTH sides of the WHOLE story. If we disagree, we're free to engage in discourse.

[TinHere]

As I said, I chose this word very carefully and I understand its full implications and signifigance. It is an historical fact that the totalitarian method for surpressing intellectual challenge to its dogma is to both control the means of production and dissemination of opinion using it to promulgate it own point of view relentlessly and imposing total censorship on all other points of view. Those who dare to speak out are not merely not allowed to speak but are punished in every other conceivable way the authorities have available to them. In Nazi Germany it meant the gestapo hauling the offender off to a concintration camp to meet a sorry fate. In Soviet Russia and other communist countries, it meant a visit from the MVD (state security) who would assist the offender's tranisit to the Gualg Archipelligo (must reading for understanding the 20th century.) All dissent no matter how seemingly innocent is viewed as a challenge to The State's authority and is treated as an act of open revolt. At Cable Asylum dissent results in a warning followed by banishment which in the sense of being able to participate in debate means the same thing. Yes this is a very powerful word with a very powerful message. And it is the correct message as far as I am concerned and when I can no longer express it here, I'm leaving since this place will have become no better than the other one.

I'm sure you chose your words very carefully and said what you did for impact. Nobody gets killed here and that's why I said what I did. I actually didn't even remember who said it, just that I thought it was over the top. Not an issue I would like to debate on this venue. In deference to the your contributions and the knowledge you impart I would rather see that in the rare moment than see this site lose what you have to offer. I hope you give Chris a fair chance and see what he did as his attempt to make things better even if you don't agree. Like I said earlier, and you said, it probably would have just died on it's own when those interested in it were ready to move on. Everyone else could ignore the thread. I wonder if those that complained are regular participants or like me just pop in once in awhile. If the complaints were from newcomers to the site maybe Chris felt compelled to show them that there will be some moderation in the hopes of having them return and contribute. Not saying right or wrong, just maybe a reason from Chris's perspective to intervene at least once. FYI...All I had to say was said on the forum and NOT in a private communication to Chris.

[skeptic]

Yes, I agree that is successful overall, but it needs a little help to regain its old form.

This statement would have carried more weight if the quality of discussions and the traffic levels hadn't proven otherwise.

I'd bet that of all the forums on this site, the cable forum has generated more traffic than any of the others. I know, I've posted on them too. Some threads here are viewed by nearly two thousand different people and that doesn't count the multiple hits from the same people who are following a thread. Some threads in the past have consisted of dozens and dozens of entries by dozens of participants.

Believe me, I don't enjoy the discussions about the other message board or about the moderator of it. It does not please me when that subject comes up and although I may have been the first to brint it up over a year ago, I haven't been the one to start new threads about it since or at least not for a long time. But there are things that need to be said and times in life when compromise is not an option. People who come here as complete beginners looking for advice on how to spend their money go there too not knowing what to believe. They get a very different message here than they get at the other board. They hear both sides of a story. And sometimes helping them decide who to believe means telling them why they get both sides here and only one side there. Putting this topic of discussion off this message board and into another category means most of those people will probably never see it. I do not see why protecting that message board from discussion and well deserved criticism here is of any value unless someone here is doing a favor for someone there. Why would that be? It doesn't smell right to me.

[FLZapped]

Chris,

It seems to me, after reading some of your replies, that closing a thread, especially one that was heading in a different direction of it's own volition, was the wrong statement to make considering what had transpired in very recent events elsewhere.

You had the option of moving it to the Off Topic forum, why not do that?

Since you wish to improve the quality, start by getting rid of this pitiful format and find something that is FAST and easier to follow. I realize that this software makes it easier on you, but it is a millstone around the necks of the users.

The vast majority of people who complain about his site and leave, complain about how slow it is and has been for many a moon - long before this format change. The second largerst compaint, I remember, is the large number of trolls that inhabited some of the forums, I distinctly remember the General forum having it's troubles. The cable forum never really seemed overly bothered by them, beyond that, I can't speak for the other forums.

Of the forums I did check occationally, this one and the general forum appeared to have the greatest activity. So I don't know why you think there is a particular problem here.

Further, one of the people who moderates at the Cable Forum at AA only comes here to use this place as his private dumping ground(which he did again very recently).....he'd never get caught dead posting the stuff there that he posts here, so why not ban him from here?

So that's my 2 cents.

-Bruce

PS - If I want to rant about how another forum is run, I believe I should be able to and alert others how they are likely to be treated! - Especially since it seems to be only one board out of many, many available. (okay, make it 3 cents)

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

Chris -

You know what's different about AR and most of the other forums that use moderators? The workload is shared among many, not a few or in the case of this board, one. Or so it seems. I thought I recognized an entire group of mods but why is it that you're the only one that assumes that position? And if that is the case, it will certainly turn into a "lynch mob" mentality where whatever you say or do will be scrutinized and ridiculed by someone. There should be moderators appointed to each forum, with a "super mod" or administrator that would oversee things in they're absence or acting as arbitrator.

And if I were you I wouldn't embroil myself in a debate on the role of a moderator. The administration or each mod [if given that power] decides what is appropriate in that forum, and while that could be questioned by the readership, I wouldn't engage in a public debate. Instead you could post forum guidelines or each mod could post their own guidelines for their forum. But I wouldn't explain my actions every time they are called into question. Instead just PM the party or parties off-line to clarify matters or action taken.

Another difference I see is that most forums choose moderators from the core membership. They were well known and established before adopting the position. And I'm sure many of the regulars could assume how the "rules" would be interpreted based on prior association or observation of that person. And while they may not necessarily have been the most popular member they were respected and the bond with the forum established.

In the forum I moderate there is little argument among the regulars in how the mods govern. And the few that did eventually resigned in part because of those problems. This is not to say that mistakes aren't made or that the mods are always in agreement in how each forum administrator handles things but any disagreement is kept off-line. Once in a while mods will clash but cooler heads prevail and we "agree to disagree".

Do what you want, but I see this going in a bad direction as things stand right now. Get some help or be more discrete about engaging the members and don't feel like you need to explain yourself. I think most everyone understands how he or she should behave, they're just yanking your chain.

As I stated in an earlier post, I don't believe the Cable Forum is the proper outlet for the ongoing criticism of individuals or rival forums. Rather than axe the thread I'd have just moved it to a less specific forum [General / Off-Topic]. At the same time I wouldn't allow members from a competing forum to take pot shots at regulars here either. I realize the rancor goes with the subject matter and history isn't exactly on your side but if the forum doesn't take the high road it's little more than troll bait.

MikE

[Jim Clark]

Hi Mike, excellent points with one major problem-who wants to be a moderator? The solicitation in the feedback forum didn't exactly catch fire. Tough job, although the AR tee-shirt would be cool!

jc

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

I was thinking the same thing. And I was going to suggest [still a good idea] taking the soliciting of the moderation positions a step further by asking key members if they would consider accepting. If the readership really wants to make this a better place and have a say so in what goes on then why not volunteer? Then I asked myself, "Would I be willing to do that?". No, I'm afraid I wouldn't for a number of reasons but foremost is that I just don't feel comfortable playing nurse maid to what can be a volatile forum. I don't need that.

One of reasons I pursued the mod position at AK was because of our members and being able to discuss, as host, my real passion - tube electronics. I didn't foresee any problems with what was then a rather small, close nit group of people. Now we have grown since and potential trouble is only a post away but I've been rather fortunate thus far, in that most [though not all] of the members that frequent that forum are emotionally balanced. I've never edited [except typos], deleted [knowingly] or closed a thread. I've split or moved threads but only when that was requested. And the few times I've had to separate heated combatants the issues were resolved off-line. I try my best to not publically criticize anyone in my forum or do so in a way they don't "lose face". Still we may have lost a member or two because of my intervention but that's the price you pay to keep it a fun and educational place for everyone without fear of ridicule or persecution. Which I realize can be a fine line between posing or interpreting "hard questions".

MikE

[Chris]

I was thinking the same thing. And I was going to suggest [still a good idea] taking the soliciting of the moderation positions a step further by asking key members if they would consider accepting. If the readership really wants to make this a better place and have a say so in what goes on then why not volunteer? Then I asked myself, "Would I be willing to do that?". No, I'm afraid I wouldn't for a number of reasons but foremost is that I just don't feel comfortable playing nurse maid to what can be a volatile forum. I don't need that.

One of reasons I pursued the mod position at AK was because of our members and being able to discuss, as host, my real passion - tube electronics. I didn't foresee any problems with what was then a rather small, close nit group of people. Now we have grown since and potential trouble is only a post away but I've been rather fortunate thus far, in that most [though not all] of the members that frequent that forum are emotionally balanced. I've never edited [except typos], deleted [knowingly] or closed a thread. I've split or moved threads but only when that was requested. And the few times I've had to separate heated combatants the issues were resolved off-line. I try my best to not publically criticize anyone in my forum or do so in a way they don't "lose face". Still we may have lost a member or two because of my intervention but that's the price you pay to keep it a fun and educational place for everyone without fear of ridicule or persecution. Which I realize can be a fine line between posing or interpreting "hard questions".

MikE
Mike, I like your points. I wouldn't normally try and explain myself, but everyone knows that we've lost a great deal of interaction due to our lack of moderation. Maybe not specifically in the Cables forum, but across the board in the AudioReview forums. And it seems a bit harsh to see cries of censorship when the first thread is locked. Not surpising since anything and everything has been acceptable in the past, but still a little harsh.

This is by no means a "dictatorship", as my intention has always been to select moderators who know a little more about the subject matter. The tough part is, choosing the right people. Only since we've adopted this new system format (that we will be keeping by the way, Bruce), have we been able to quickly research past posts by each member. We'll soon be able to make an educated decision when choosing moderators based on their posting history. It's still a little frustrating when people keep insinuating (as Skeptic just did) that we make these type of decisions to close threads based on money - as if we have anything to gain by protecting Cable Asylum. I guess some people will always want to believe in a conspiracy even if you're just trying to be fair. I've already stated that isn't the case, so believe what you will.

As I said before - my intention is to return these forums back to their original glory. The first order of business is to weed out the trolls who flame others for the sake of entertainment. We'll also work on closing discussions that get out of control, off topic, and have degraded into flamefests.

If anyone wants to continue this discussion, they can PM me with their thoughts and questions. I think I've been clear with my explanations. I'm sure my words can be picked apart and reassembled in many other ways that will keep this going for 3 more pages.